보험수익자의 개입권에 관한 연구

초록

Insurance beneficiaries of the intervention program is that insurance beneficiaries become entitled to a refund, and charge status of the insured in case of the creditor’s seizure or the bankruptcy by the agreement of the insured to avoid extinction of the insurance contract. Legally seeing, the insurance beneficiaries free of cost(insurance premium) in a position are in a position to adapt to the insurance contracts. It is more so especially in life insurance contracts for others. That’s why the insurance beneficiaries have the materialized right if insurance accident occurs, but in the earlier stages, there is only the right of expectation of it. However, if the insurance premiums paid by the insured does not bring value to the beneficiary’s life due to the insured’s deteriorated financial circumstances, and in the prerequisite of that the interests of other stakeholders are not infringed, it is not unreasonable to avoid that circumstances. Here the system of intervention of the insurance beneficiary would be required. There is a need to look at the legislations of Germany and Japan. The German system of intervention is influenced by that of Austria(1917). In Germany, the intervention system is applied only to the limited types of insurance. Namely, the intervention system applies to insurance which has the reserves aiming the economically stable life of the dependents. In addition, it is required that there is an enforcement or foreclosure of the insurance credit or the insured’s bankruptcy. The intervention will require the consent of the insured. A partial agreement on the part of the sum insured is allowed. In Japan, whether there is a man of right of intervention or not, when the insurance contract has been cancelled, the effects should be stopped for a month from the time of the notice of the insurer, which is the result of the modifications of the German system. We have the resurrection system of the insurance contract, the system of exceptional paying of insurance premiums by beneficiary instead of the insured, and the system of resurrection in the formed clause. However, the intervention system of beneficiaries of insurance contracts have a lot more convenient than the resurrection of an insurance contract(Commercial Act). To introduce the intervention of beneficiaries in this country, balancing the need to protect the beneficiary should be considered. Insurers have no reason to oppose to the system of intervention particularly. However, the difference between the policyholder and the insurance beneficiary should be taken into account and we should not unilaterally impose a sacrifice to one contractual party. Even if we allow such intervening system in Korea, the step of seizing(German system), the type of life insurance(death insurance) would be regarded as reasonable. And the man of intervention should be limited to relatives who need to get a boost rather than that of Germany. The relative of the insureds can exercise the right to intervene, which would be agreeable to the idea of family protection.

키워드